Russia continues to wreak havoc on Ukraine as temperatures there hover below freezing, with missile strikes today further damaging energy infrastructure and making it harder for people to access power, heating and water. As the war heads toward its 11th month, it’s also prompting rapid reassessments elsewhere about the way militaries are funded and the equipment they have now and will need in future. Tony Capaccio and Courtney McBride report how the Pentagon is a case in point. For decades it has struggled to make procurement more agile, able to respond to changing threats and demands. It has also sought to get weapons-makers to commit to longer-term contracts. Key reading: The US is among the allies that have sent masses of weaponry to Ukraine — from missile-defense systems to artillery shells — and is staring at dwindling stockpiles with anxiety. Countries in Europe face a similar dilemma: how to keep supplying Ukraine when they are running low on weapons. That’s especially the case because the conflict has shown that 21st century wars are not just about very high-tech equipment. Yes, Russian missiles are having an impact and testing Ukraine’s defenses, with the US gearing up potentially to send Patriot batteries to Kyiv. But one of the most efficient weapons so far has been combining old-fashioned artillery with a drone for pinpoint accuracy. As Marc Champion wrote this week, there has been a heavy use of artillery by both sides — the Royal United Services Institute puts it in excess of 24,000 shells fired per day, at times much more. Ukraine is burning through 100,000 shells per month. The US produces far less than that right now. The head of Estonia’s defense intelligence center estimates Russia still has about 10 million artillery shells in stock. That all points to the war dragging on for a while. In the end, who has the advantage in the spring may come down to who has the greater arsenal by then to hand. — Rosalind Mathieson | 
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário